Acceptance of GNSO2 Review Working Group's Implementation Final Report

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

ICANN organizes independent reviews of its supporting organizations and advisory committees as prescribed in Article 4 Section 4.4 of the ICANN Bylaws, to ensure ICANN's multistakeholder model remains transparent and accountable, and to improve its performance.

This action completes the second review of the GNSO and is based on the Implementation Final Report as adopted by the GNSO Council, the final report of the independent examiner, Westlake Governance, as well as the GNSO Review Working Group's (WG) assessment of the recommendations as adopted by the GNSO Council. Following the assessment of all pertinent documents and community feedback by the OEC, the Board is now in a position to consider and accept the Implementation Final Report.

The Board, with recommendation from the Organizational Effectiveness Committee of the Board (OEC), considered all relevant documents, including the final report, the GNSO Review Working Party Feasibility Assessment and Prioritization of Recommendations by Independent Examiner ("Feasibility Assessment"), and accepted the final report issued by the independent examiner on 25 June 2016. The Board adopted the Feasibility Assessment, except recommendations 23 and 32. Additionally, the Board directed the GNSO Council to: draft an implementation plan for the adopted recommendations with a realistic timeline that took into account the continuously high community workload and consideration of the prioritization proposed by the WG; publish the plan no later than six (6) months after the Board's adoption of the Feasibility Assessment; ensure that the implementation plan includes definitions of desired outcomes and a way to measure current state as well as progress toward the desired outcome; and report back regularly to the Board on its implementation progress.

On 3 February 2017, the Board accepted the Implementation Plan provided by the WG and approved by the GNSO Council on 15 December 2016, and directed the WG to provide semi-annual updates to the OEC until such time that the implementation efforts have concluded.

What is the proposal being considered?

The proposal being considered is that the Board accepts the WG's Implementation Final Report, adopted by the GNSO Council, and considered by the OEC.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

The Board, through the OEC, consulted with the GNSO Review Working Group, who was responsible for the implementation, and recommended good practices for conducting effective reviews on a timely basis and monitored the progress of the review as well as the progress of the implementation of review recommendations.

What concerns, or issues were raised by the community?

The implementation work conducted by the GNSO followed its standard practices to promote transparency and accountability. No concerns were voiced by the community.

What significant materials did the Board review?

The Board reviewed relevant Bylaws sections, Organizational Review Process documentation, GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan, and the GNSO Review Working Group's Implementation Final Report.

What factors did the Board find to be significant?

The Board found several factors to be significant, contributing to the effective completion of the implementation work:

Convening a dedicated group that oversees the implementation of Board-accepted recommendations
An implementation plan containing a realistic timeline for the implementation, definition of desired outcomes and a way to measure current state as well as progress toward the desired outcome
Timely and detailed reporting on the progress of implementation
Are there positive or negative community impacts?

This Board action is expected to have a positive impact on the community by acknowledging and highlighting an effective completion of implementation of GNSO Review Recommendations.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget); the community; and/or the public?

This Board action is anticipated to have no fiscal impact as the implementation efforts have successfully concluded. The ramifications on the ICANN organization, the community and the public are anticipated to be positive, as this Board action signifies an important milestone for organizational reviews and self-governance of ICANN.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

This Board action is not expected to have a direct effect on security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS.

How is this action within ICANN's mission and what is the public interest served in this action?

The Board's action is consistent with ICANN's commitment pursuant to section 4.1 of the Bylaws to continue reviewing that entities within ICANN have an ongoing purpose, and to improve the performance of its supporting organizations and advisory committees. This action will serve the public interest by fulfilling ICANN's commitment to continuous review of its components to confirm that where people engage with the ICANN community support the purposes and expectations of that engagement.

Is public comment required prior to Board action?

No public comment is required.